Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 11:54:17 -0700
From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <proussel@ichips.intel.com>
Subject: Re: brotzmann 10tet + 2 in sf
For those in Portland (OR), the Peter Brotzmann 12tet will play on June 21 at
the McGuire Auditorium (Campus of Warner Pacific College).
Patrice.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 16:09:43 EDT
From: APoesia794@aol.com
Subject: brotzmann in boston
for you boston brotzmann fans:
-the Peter Brotzmann 12~Tet is scheduled to play at the Middle East (Cambridge, Ma) on the 29th. tour schedule on Joe McPhee's home page, <www.joemcphee.com>-
over and out...
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 20:02:07 EDT
From: Nudeants@aol.com
Subject: Re: webern box set
In a message dated 5/31/00 4:51:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kurt_gottschalk@scni.com writes:
<< eye em aitch oh, wait till they kicks it, then examine and enjoy away.
>>
One of my main caveats re this issue is the fact this:
Artists seek to create a body of work. As soon as any little fragment or
'lesser' item is made public, regardless of who judges it that way, it
becomes part of that body, against the artist's wishes. Do we then judge
said debris - lets face it, no matter how high quality, it still is very
often just that, in comparison with the rest of the particular oeuvre (sp?)
in question - on equal terms? To do so would seem patently absurd. To say
that an artist is not the most qualified person to judge this is also absurd.
If we trust an artist to provide us with edification of any sort, can we not
trust him to also to decide what enters his body of work, no matter what we
may feel about it?
Any remnant, no matter how historically important, has NEVER satisfied me
even in the tiniest percentage of the original amount of satisfaction that I
gain from their masterworks. To demand EVERYTHING is simply greed.
Also, the notion that the 'past' album is almost never their best due to
'lost magic' is a gross over-generalization. If in your eyes, there's a lost
magic, then shouldn't you look to yourself first to make sure that you tried
YOUR hardest? God forbid that the artist should want to change whatever
passes for his 'magical' inspiration once in a while...
I don't claim to have all the answers, (though I likely will be accused of
thinking that I do), but I would like to think that we can view our artists
as more than merely creative slaves whose every last dropping is available
to satiate our gluttonous artistic desires.
- -matt mitchell
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 18:25:03 -0700
From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <proussel@ichips.intel.com>
Subject: Re: webern box set
On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 20:02:07 EDT Nudeants@aol.com wrote:
>
> Artists seek to create a body of work. As soon as any little fragment or
> 'lesser' item is made public, regardless of who judges it that way, it
> becomes part of that body, against the artist's wishes. Do we then judge
> said debris - lets face it, no matter how high quality, it still is very
> often just that, in comparison with the rest of the particular oeuvre (sp?)
> in question - on equal terms? To do so would seem patently absurd. To say
> that an artist is not the most qualified person to judge this is also absurd.
> If we trust an artist to provide us with edification of any sort, can we not
> trust him to also to decide what enters his body of work, no matter what we
> may feel about it?
You talk in the abstract and ignoring any material constraints, as if the
artist was living in Disneyland...
The only problem is that the artist is also part of a socio-economic process.
As such, he is put in a competitive environment where he is supposed to
deliver because if he fails to do so, he will be thrown away (and I am not
only talking about rock music; this is also true, but in a different form,
in less commercial forms of art).
I will also mention something that is taboo: maybe the artist, after a few
sparks of creativity, has not much to add. But since he has put a big
portion of his life in his artistic carreer, he has to keep going on.
This situation makes it sometimes hard to know if the artist is talking
sincerely of what he is doing, or simply playing the game of economics.
It is well known that some elements of artistic activity grow with
experience/age: craftmanship, mastery of the instrument (if we put aside
the acrobatics), arranging skills, etc. On the other side, all these
skills are usually absent from the early works of many of the artists
that we are talking about on this list (Zorn was an exciting player in the
late '70s, but not the level that is showing now in Masada). So, why did
we in first place got excited by them?
Let's face it, if an artist was acknowledging that his last record sucks,
that would be counterproductive, right? But, if I follow you, such situation
is impossible because an artist would never do a bad record, right? It is
only us, the consummer, who are not doing our homework, right?
> Any remnant, no matter how historically important, has NEVER satisfied me
> even in the tiniest percentage of the original amount of satisfaction that I
> gain from their masterworks. To demand EVERYTHING is simply greed.
I agree with you with the "necrophilic" attitude of labels/publishers to
put out every crumbs.
> Also, the notion that the 'past' album is almost never their best due to
> 'lost magic' is a gross over-generalization. If in your eyes, there's a lost
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sure! I agree that I was exagerating. But don't you feel sometimes that
you don't agree with an artist when he claims that his last record is the
best? Or does the fact that he claims it to be so is enough for you to
turn off any critical judgement?
Patrice.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 16:05:22 EDT
From: APoesia794@aol.com
Subject: tape traders...
hello zorn-listers.
i have started an email list for tape traders. the focus is improv, experimental, noise and all that "jazz" (hehe).
to subscribe please go to:
http://www.egroups.com/group/improv-trade
peace. jason w. t.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 00:35:17 EDT
From: Nudeants@aol.com
Subject: Re: webern box set
Patrice,
I agree with a number of the things you say, yet they don't necessarily have
a bearing on the point I was trying to make.
I'm not suggesting that we suspend critical judgement, only that we suspend
our demand for every last scrap of material from an artist. However, the
amount of work and thought we as 'consumer,' 'listener,' etc. that we put in
needs to be seriously reassessed
I agree that sometimes the artists we know run out of things to say.
Sometimes they over-burden us with a massive catalog. (Paul Bley, David
Murray, Braxton...even Zorn, dare I say) In either case, why argue for the
right to sift throught the remains an drag out the items the artist himself
did not consider essential. Those that run out of ideas most likely won't be
hiding anything else, and over-recorded artists make our work cut out for us
already.
Who's over-recorded and underrecorded, though, is a different and less
interesting (to me) bag of (insert small object)
Also: if anyone exists that would admit that their last record sucked or was
sub-par, then they're not an artist, and thus they also would be outside the
crux of this particular biscuit. Yet, if an artist claims that he feels his
last work to be his finest, maybe we should take that into consideration when
assessing their work for ourselves.
Its my guess, though, that most artists worthy of the term would view their
body of work as an ever-changing entity, something that would change shape
each new addition and take on new overall significance. This, to me, is one
of the truly fascinating aspects of studying an artist. The finest in their
field all have this going for them: Duke, Miles, Keith Jarrett, Zappa,
Prince, Xenakis, Wolgang Rihm, Elliott Carter (to name just some of my
favorites)
- -matt mitchell
- -
------------------------------
End of Zorn List Digest V2 #951
*******************************
To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
"majordomo@lists.xmission.com"
with
"unsubscribe zorn-list-digest"
in the body of the message.
For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
"help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
in the commands above with "zorn-list".
Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
pub/lists/zorn-list/archive. These are organized by date.
Problems? Email the list owner at zorn-list-owner@lists.xmission.com
